On Becoming a Novelist contains the wisdom accumulated during John Gardner's distinguished twenty-year career as a fiction writer and creative writ...
read full description
reviews
Jan 26, 2010
Maren
rated it: 
This is one of the best books I've ever read about writing. Interestingly, it's not actually about the process of writing, but more a rumination on what it takes to be a writer and what kind of personalities are the best suited for it. John Gardner writes beautifully and precisely about the persistence required to keep writing even when the odds are stacked against you and has the most to say about "young writers" as he calls them. Being a young writer, I found everything he had to say
More...
0 comments
like
(1 person liked it)
Jun 06, 2010
David
rated it: 
This slim volume is an easy read with a lot of insightful commentary by a well-respected writer. I've never read any of Gardner's novels, but I may have to try one just to see how what he said about the writing process played out in practice. The book is a mix of "How to write" fundamentals that go deeper than just "Don't overuse adverbs" and personal reflections on how the writing process works for him. It's aimed quite explicitly at those who really want to make a career as
More...
Jan 24, 2010
Rosina
rated it:
If our furniture was as poorly made as our fiction, we would always be falling onto the floor. -- John Gardner
I have, and appreciate, Gardner's books on writing. By all accounts he was a fantastic teacher, and the exercises in On Becoming a Novelist bear that out. Anyone confused about POV will benefit especially from many of the short writing prompts.
What worries me about his approach - and the current fashion in the literary genre specifically -- is this kind of quot More...
Feb 05, 2012
Edward
rated it:
Gardner writes clearly and elegantly. I've never read his novels, but as I teach screenwriting, I wanted his take on how writers develop. Much of what he says jibes with my own experiences, and he has a wider view. He treats different literary styles, and he can describe the skills and career path of the short story writer vs. the novelist.
Many small chunks of the book are worth the price of admission. Gardner has a wonderful characterization of what makes a first-rate novelist: one ty More...
Many small chunks of the book are worth the price of admission. Gardner has a wonderful characterization of what makes a first-rate novelist: one ty More...
Mar 10, 2011
Izlinda
rated it:
Had to read this book for a class, and it was not an English class.
John Gardner passed away in 1982. This book was originally published one year after his death, (its first publication by Norton was in 1999). I don’t believe the 28-29 year gap makes the advice particularly dated, though it did make me question how Gardner would consider the impact of computers and the Internet in becoming a novelist. I also wondered if Gardner would use examples in the recent years as examples of ex More...
John Gardner passed away in 1982. This book was originally published one year after his death, (its first publication by Norton was in 1999). I don’t believe the 28-29 year gap makes the advice particularly dated, though it did make me question how Gardner would consider the impact of computers and the Internet in becoming a novelist. I also wondered if Gardner would use examples in the recent years as examples of ex More...
0 comments
like
(1 person liked it)
Sep 18, 2009
Randy
rated it:
A book that is somehow simultaneously enlightening and depressing. Gardner offers up advice that ends up being a bit less about HOW to write a novel than WHAT it takes to be a novelist. And what it takes, it turns out, is desire, a strong work ethic, high artistic standards and low monetary expectations. It was interesting to see that a lifelong professional like Gardner encountered the same day-to-day hangups that I do. So the book is an eye opener to some degree, though a beginning writer
More...
Dec 11, 2009
Pat
rated it: 
"After verbal sensitivity, accuracy of eye, and a measure of the special intelligence of the storyteller, what the writer probably needs most is an almost daemonic compulsiveness.
....
"A psychological wound is helpful, if it can be kept in partial control, to keep the novelist driven. Some fatal childhood accident for which one feels responsible and can never quite fully forgive oneself; a sense that one never quite earned one's parents' love; shame about one's origins—belli More...
....
"A psychological wound is helpful, if it can be kept in partial control, to keep the novelist driven. Some fatal childhood accident for which one feels responsible and can never quite fully forgive oneself; a sense that one never quite earned one's parents' love; shame about one's origins—belli More...
Nov 13, 2010
Shala
rated it:
I very much enjoyed this book. And found it quite encouraging. Many books on writing have the ironic effect of making me never want to write again (which is why I avoid them in general unless I have a specific question on craft). This one didn't. I do wish, though, that he used more women writers in his examples. Women don't show up at all in his lists of folks to read/emulate until at least one third of the way into the book, and even then there are only a couple of them, while men are everywhe
More...
Sep 14, 2009
Dan
rated it:
Gardner understood why he wrote and had experience enough teaching to generalize. He comes off preachy, opinionated, rigid, and on occasion incredibly elitist in what qualifies and "art", but read as one man's opinions about what it takes to be a novelist it was incredibly interesting.
I was somewhat disappointed that there weren't more concrete examples of what he considered to be exemplary writing. However, having now read the book, that really wasn't what he was trying More...
I was somewhat disappointed that there weren't more concrete examples of what he considered to be exemplary writing. However, having now read the book, that really wasn't what he was trying More...
Jan 12, 2012
Louise
rated it:
Reading this book doesn't give you the sense that you're learning a lot of new information or technique but that's because it taps into something you recognise as true. By that I don't mean that it's basic, it's just not that kind of book. What it does do, however, is reassure the writer. All writers have doubts about whether he or she really is a writer and this book did convince me, for the time being at least, that I am. It also smuggled in a few hints on the way.
What made this boo More...
What made this boo More...
Jan 27, 2011
Rob
rated it:
Gardner covers several areas of his answer to "Do I have what it takes to be a writer?" The areas were:
- Verbal sensitivity
- Accuracy and originality of "eye"
- Intelligence, i.e. a writer's intelligence
He says profluence is the reason the reader turns the page.
He says that the writer should give the reader an experience that is a "vivid, continuous dream".
He says common standards for good fiction are:
- More...
- Verbal sensitivity
- Accuracy and originality of "eye"
- Intelligence, i.e. a writer's intelligence
He says profluence is the reason the reader turns the page.
He says that the writer should give the reader an experience that is a "vivid, continuous dream".
He says common standards for good fiction are:
- More...
Dec 01, 2011
Angela
rated it:
Gardner is an elitist, but a compassionate one, if that makes sense. He holds himself to the highest standards, artistically and morally, and addresses this book to those artists who are as uncompromising as he is. I say uncompromising, but that doesn't mean either idealistic or cynical. He sees clearly what wonders people are capable of, and that's what he cares about, though he sees just as clearly how incompetent we all can be and advises how to deal with that as well. He's noble of spirit, a
More...
Sep 19, 2011
Jason
rated it:
There's little point in expounding on what's written about in this book. It would only be a less than convincing repeat of what Gardner does himself. All I can say is that if you care at all about writing - and not exclusively novels, as the title suggests, but any writing at all - then read it. At times the writing can be quite awkward. Its meaning is still there, but parenthesis and vile amounts of commas can occasionally disrupt the overall flow. Despite this, the scope of what's inside can't
More...
Dec 03, 2010
Mad Russian
rated it:
I actually hope to be a genre writer first and a literary fictionist after much practice. I enjoyed to book the most for it's analysis of some of the mental gyrations an author goes through while creating. I agree with his philosophy on what should motivate a writer, and I liked that he has said what every writer I've heard interviewed has said, that is, that one should work really hard--write for a long time and then as one's facility with words becomes greater, one will be able to invoke the d
More...
Sep 12, 2008
Taka
rated it:
He knows what he's talking about--
It's a short book (just over 140 pages) and reads elegantly throughout. The book doesn't provide practical advice on fiction writing. It's more a book about what it takes to be a novelist. Some issues he takes up are outdated (e.g. he considers a question he was often asked: typewriter or pen?), but overall, the book is full of useful gems for anyone thinking about becoming a writer.
I for one was happy to find in it confirmations of my ow More...
It's a short book (just over 140 pages) and reads elegantly throughout. The book doesn't provide practical advice on fiction writing. It's more a book about what it takes to be a novelist. Some issues he takes up are outdated (e.g. he considers a question he was often asked: typewriter or pen?), but overall, the book is full of useful gems for anyone thinking about becoming a writer.
I for one was happy to find in it confirmations of my ow More...
Apr 27, 2008
Joseph
rated it:
I read this for the first time back in college when I was a complete idiot and hated it. I reread it recently, now being only partially an idiot, and loved it. Many people who I've talked to about this book had a similar experience to my first read. They thought Gardner was perhaps too didactic or prescriptive. I don't think that's the case at all. I think he's laying it down in this book how it really is: trying to be a writer is really fucking hard, really fucking time consuming, and really fu
More...
May 30, 2009
Joshua
rated it:
This book is a god-send for writers. Much of what Gardner writes is equally applicable to short-story writers (like me). For one thing, Gardner talks about typical personality foibles/quirks that many writers have . . . it was nice knowing I wasn't the only weirdo who thinks and behaves that way.
Gardner's writing is a pleasure to read, and he doesn't try to fit every writer into a preconceived mold as some do. If you want to write fiction, then get this book. It is a classic.
Gardner's writing is a pleasure to read, and he doesn't try to fit every writer into a preconceived mold as some do. If you want to write fiction, then get this book. It is a classic.
Jul 05, 2009
Martin
rated it:
Good one. Not as enjoyable for me as The Art of Fiction. Gardner is really serious about his writing. He is a great critic and reader though. His breakdown of Melville's language is super. He doesn't just tell you Melville writes with authority, he shows you.
I love his suggestion that the young writer live off his spouse if possible, without guilt, or get a part time job, maybe rural mail carrier!!
I swear I'll read your fiction one day John Champlin Gardner Jr.
I love his suggestion that the young writer live off his spouse if possible, without guilt, or get a part time job, maybe rural mail carrier!!
I swear I'll read your fiction one day John Champlin Gardner Jr.
Jan 13, 2011
Bee
rated it:
Read this for a writing class I'm taking. It's a wee bit outdated, but still interesting to some extent. The section where the author suggests that a certain degree of psychological damage early in life may be beneficial to a writer just made me laugh. The constant use of "him" and "he", makes me...yeah, not happy! The author is way snarky...which at times is refreshing and at times...self righeous and dull. Inspiring though!
Apr 30, 2010
Sonja
rated it:
Gardner's kind of hard-core. Like if you don't work hard or if you enjoy playing with language too much, you won't be a good novelist. And while that is probably true, those of us with lazy wordy tendencies need some love too, John Gardner! Anyway, a good book with no-nonsense advice. I just had to keep changing he's to she's, and young writer to not-so-young writer. Read as part of my delving into the world of fiction writing advice by men.
Oct 25, 2010
Marianne D.
rated it:
A great book to read if you're already writing - whether published or with the intent of getting published. Solid information, entertainingly presented. I laughed out loud at some anecdotes and often found myself nodding in agreement to examples of the assumptions and actual practice of a working writer. I think this book would work for all writers, not just novelists.
Jan 18, 2009
James
rated it:
This book has been helpful to me as I make a return to writing in the long form. The best thing about it are Gardner's categories of frigidity, which Gardner defines as not caring enough about the characters, and sentimentality, which he sees as trying to use language to generate emotion the story doesn't justify. Those are good rocks to steer clear of.
Dec 19, 2011
Kim
rated it:
I am always apprehensive reading these "how to write" books since the steps don't work for me or I just find them ludicrous. While this book had some of those aspects, Gardner also remarked on things about becoming and being a writer that felt like epiphanies to me when reading them. I felt I could relate, that I was not alone, that it is just this hard for everyone, and I don't have to be one kind of writer to be the best writer. It reassured me, challenged me, scared me and excited m
More...
Jun 02, 2009
Jackie
rated it: 
I'm glad I read this - but was also glad I got it from the library. I checked it out thinking I'd buy a copy if it really 'spoke' to me - but it didn't. It seemed more directed at a college-age writer, trying to decide about getting an MFA or not. Being an *ahem* slightly older than college-age writer, there were only a few parts that felt relevant for me.
Sep 17, 2010
Zachary
rated it:
Take the best of Gardner and leave the rest to its own fate. His thoughts on writing are going to be a little to conservative for lots of people, and his antiquated language will turn even more readers off. He, however, spent his life writing and teaching people how to write and I think there is something to be said for his insight into craft.
Dec 10, 2009
Aurora
rated it:
Much of this book felt like it was written specifically for me. (A couple of parts felt like Gardner wrote them just for himself. I just ignored them.) He understands the anxieties young writers can have--even ones they might not know they have--better than anyone else I've read, and helped me feel less weird about myself. Generally a good thing.
Sep 17, 2010
Wm
rated it:
It's John Gardner so you know it's going to take a rather narrow definition of fiction and a somewhat reactionary, contrarian view of the writing process, and it was published three decades ago so you know it's going to be rather out-of-date in places, but the explorations of psychology and craft are fascinating. Perhaps not useful as self-help, but an interesting read as literary history/criticism and the mythos of The Important Novelist.
Sep 14, 2009
Cmacauley
rated it:
Oriented towards beginning writers, little about this book is memorable and much of it was monotonous. I read it because I loved 'Grendel', but Gardner's advice on writing is neither profound nor very original. A lot of talk about how to write stream of conscious (the "waking dream") which was not terribly useful for me.
Dec 17, 2010
"Finally, the true novelist is the one who doesn't quit. Novel-writing is not so much a profession as a yoga, or "way," an alternative to ordinary life-in-the-world. Its benefits are quasi-religious--a changed quality of mind and heart, satisfactions no non-novelist can understand--and its rigors generally bring no profit except to the spirit. For those who are authentically called to the profession, spiritual profits are enough."
My third (fourth?) reread of this bo More...
My third (fourth?) reread of this bo More...
Oct 01, 2009
N.
rated it:
So good. So many great quotes from here. A realistic view of what it's like to be a writer. He is so right on. I have written down many quotes from this book and plan on purchasing it. It is awesome.
